Main menu

You are here

Week ahead

Matt Westerhold

Sep 23, 2012

It will be interesting to see city commissioners wrestle now with the city's labor attorney concerning a decision to reinstate a fired police officer. The rehiring went almost unnoticied during the public portion of a commission meeting earlier this month, and city commissioners did not appear concerned. Now commissioner Julie Farrar wants a closed-door session with labor attorney Mark Fishel, and commissioner Jeff Smith is backing her up.

It's an uncomfortable call-out coming from Farrar, given her union campaign contributions and union connections. Fishel has dodged and ducked legitimate inquiries from the Register in the past in irritating ways. He very might well deserve to be on the hot seat, but Farrar leading the charge as the union contracts all are expiring smells like a dirty diaper.

*

Matt Westerhold is managing editor of the Register. Westerhold writes a weekly column in the Sunday Register and he is a member of the media company's editorial board. He often also writes about his personal views in this opinion blog.

Comments

wiredmama222

Mon, 09/24/2012 - 1:04am

Why is Farrar and Smith NOW doing this when they had the chance to speak up earlier? I would have thought they would have questioned Ms Ard and others in this matter prior to this man getting his job back, especially since this entire thing was such a mess to begin with.

I have to agree with Mrs Farrar and Mr. Smith that he should NOT have been allowed to return to work with such questonable problems having been OFF work, but I would have thought the commissioners would have brought this up PRIOR to his being rehired. Why now?

And why is this Mr. Fishel so reluctant to answer questions being asked by the SR? What has he to hide? Interesting.

But you won't get anything out of he or Mrs Farrar or Mr Smith when it comes to ES either. They can't.

I would think this is something better discussed in public now that its all in the light of day anyway. Why do this in ES now? How silly.

Everyone already knows about this anyway. Did the "union attorney" insist on following the ES, or did Ms Farrar and Mr. Smith?

It's all just a myth

Mon, 09/24/2012 - 8:07am

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained Profane, obscene, sexual or derogatory language.

richrs

Mon, 09/24/2012 - 9:09am

I'm tired of this phrase 'unfit for duty' being used like he was a nut case. He was stressed out and had enough sense to take leave, the city should be grateful. If he is determined to be ready to go back to work let the man do his job.

Julie R.

Mon, 09/24/2012 - 9:32am

Take it from one in the know. If this attorney is ducking and dodging legitimate inquiries from the SR, then this attorney was working in collusion with the court of Binette from the onset. In other words, this case was already decided even before it began. That crap is illegal but attorneys and the Erie County courts do it all the time.

car 54

Mon, 09/24/2012 - 10:54am

Did Ms. Ard and Mr. Icsman hold back information from the commission? Holding a closed session to discuss such actions after the general meeting resolves nothing for the public.

bobaluey

Mon, 09/24/2012 - 1:18pm

SR,
ya might want to check your glitches I'm getting nothing but text over text and ads over text, on some stuff

Julie R.

Mon, 09/24/2012 - 1:52pm

My 2nd opinion on this was --- if the city's Columbus attorney claimed he relied on the employees from the Clerk of Court to mail out pertinent information on time to the union's attorneys and the employees didn't do it --- and if that took place back when Barb Johnson was the Clerk and on a medical leave --- then the attorney could very well be telling the truth. On the other hand, if this attorney has been known to dodge legitimate inquiries from the SR in the past, I would have to say my 1st opinion instead was right on target. You can bet the city's attorney and the court had this case decided even before it began, which means Binette's joke reprimand of this attorney was nothing but a farce.

Nor'easter

Mon, 09/24/2012 - 4:59pm

Why do you post your article on the blogs, but never post those of Rufus????

Fireside

Mon, 09/24/2012 - 5:40pm

Aawww, let him back to work. Coon hunting season is upon us.

wiredmama222

Wed, 09/26/2012 - 8:19am

You know, I am beginning to wonder if it isn't time for the City of Sandusky to cry "uncle' and just give up. Let Perkins take us over or just combine with them. We are in a losing battle and are totally ineffective as a "city". Let's admit it freely. Time to be self-actualized and just get it over with. Our city commissioners are doing nothing. They overspend and get nowhere. Our city manager never speaks and if she does her answers usually are "I will have to get back to you on that'. Mr. Icman tries but I think he is overworked. And the rest is just a bunch of infighting amongst the councilpeople who DON'T GET ALONG AND SHOW IT. Most of the work that gets done is by outside help.
Perkins gets things done and we sit here and do nothing.
Lets face it, we failed. This city is dying right in front of our eyes and all we do is watch. Our elected officials can't even find a new police chief without spending a ton of money and fighting about it. It is downright embarrassing.
Just stop and think. We could join with Perkins. Redistrict the entire area. Become one BIG city, elect people from each district, combine the police (let perkins handle with their chief.) combine the fire department, streets,etc and just get on with it.
We would all be better off.

This way just isn't working. Maybe Perkins can teach us something about how to do things the right way. Obviously this way isn't working.

richrs

Wed, 09/26/2012 - 8:38am

Wired
Uh, we don't want Sandusky out here in Perkins.

wiredmama222

Wed, 09/26/2012 - 10:36am

well, think of all the money you guys would get and land. You suffocated us like a ring around our necks for years now, so why not admit defeat. To the victor goes the spoils. You win, you take it. Tough noughies. Whoever decided to kill us, did it.